The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1887-05-11
A FUTURE LIFE.
a Symposium of Scientific Think ers Upon
the Hereafter.
IChristian Register

a ~ mposium of Scientific Think ers Upon
the Hereafter
[Christian Register
Once the church was the only oracle;
now science has an oracle of its own, at
which the church itself must inquire. The
question which it now puts to science is,
What have you to say on the great theme
OF Immortality Must the belief in the
Immortality OF the soul share the fate of
the belief in the literal resurrection Of the
body2 The answers we have given from
twenty-three scientific men present the
conditions under which such belief may
be held, the difficulties which assail it, the
indications which support it.
What shall we say of the evidence?
l. 1t must be noticed that doctors in sci
ence like doctors in theology, do not agree.
Nor If we had authority to lock up the e
for week-a measure to which we should
be extremely loath to resort-sh0uld we be
able to secure unanimous verdict. There
is therefore, no decision to be accepted or
set aside, but simply disagreement TO be
analysed. II we could multiply these wit
nesses by hundred or a thousand, the evil
| dence before us would be no stronger. It
would exhibit precisely the same variety Of
opinion. The question can not be settled
by majority vote either of scientists or of
churchmen.
2. If unanimity can be found anywhere
in these articles, it is most nearly attained
in the general concession that science can
not show that Immortality is impossible.
Mr.. John Fiske said, not long ago, that
philosophically the relation of science to
immortality stands today Just about where
it stood in the time of Descrates-that is,
there is no more positive proof against the
doctrine now than there was then. Pro-
fessor Asaph Hail, in the article we pub
lish, also says: The metaphysical argu-
ments and analogies of Spinoza, Butler and
Kant may be repeated to-day with as much
force as ever; and the answers and dis
cussions must be essentially the same"
Professor NeWcomb does not think that
''modern investigation has brought to
light any new facts which really bear upon
the question" Professor Lesley says:
Science can not possibly either teach or
deny Immortality" Professor Huxley,
Herbert Spencer and Professor Morse are
agnostics on the subject.
3. 1t is to be noted that the evidence
against immortality presented in these ar
ticles is contested by some who take the
agnostic position. Thus Professor Ward
and DR.. Leldy both think that conscious
ness exists no longer than the organized
brain, but Professor Huxley, on the other
band, challenges this very assumption:
''If (one) says that consciousness can not
exist except in relation of cause and effect
with certain organic molecules must ask
how he knows that, and il he says it can
must put the same question" The diff
ficulty, however, of believing in the per-
sistence of consciousness after the dissolu-
ton of the brain is one which is evidently
felt by most of the writers whose opinions
we have sought.
4. While there are those in this group of
scientists who do not ind that the discov-
cries of science have In any way under
mined their personal belief in Immortality,
there are others who find evidence in sci
ence which makes their belief even
stronger. 1t is to be noted here, however,
that those who agree in believing IN i'm
mortality do not wholly agree as to why
they believe in it. Professor Asaph Hall
| is able to say: 81 think the discoveries OF
modern science strengthen the belief in
immortality" DR.. Gould, DR.. Gray and
DR.. Hill seem to find the belief implied in
theism itself. DR.. Gould points to ''the
immanence of the Deity in all physical
phenomena, as well as the permanency of
the individual through and beyond all
physical changes which may affect him."
and adds that profound and unbiased
study of any branch of natural science
should lead to disbelief in Immortality
seems to me preposterous."
DR.. Hill finds the solution to be that
''man is in communication with the Creator
Of the universe" Professor James D. Dana,
although he does not offer any logical proof
for his belief, says as emphatically as DR..
Gould: 'I am strongly of the opinion, 1
should say decidedly, that there is nothing
| in science or any possible developments
from investigations OF nature against i'm
4 mortality"
Professor Young, of Princeton, leaps
4 strongly to the opinion that the question is
| out of the pale of science altogether. And
| President Barnard thinks that science has
1 nothing whatever to say on the question"
Il But both of these gentlemen find in revela-
\ ton the basis of their faith in immortality.
| The same may be said of Professor Josiah
l P. Cooke and Sir William Dawson. Pro-
\ fessor T. Sterry Hunt believes in condi-
| tional immortality, the gift of God.
On the other hand, Professor A. r Wal
| lace, who is also supported in his belief by
i Professor Crooke, the eminent English
4 chemist, turns for evidence to modern spir-
| itualism, the phenomena of which he con-
siders may be subjected to scientific tests.
| DR.. Elliott Coues thinks there is not much
| in the discoveries of psychic science, not
/ only to support or strengthen the belief in
| Immortality, but to convert the belief into
knowledge"
DR.. Cope and Professor Pierc6 do not hes
itate to grapple athletically with the logi-
/ cal problems involved in the relations of
i mind to matter. They both take strong
/ and well.forti6ed ground against the me-
Il chanlcal and automatic philosophy.
We have laid emphasis in our inquiries
on the point of personal consciousness, be-
1 cause this has always been an important
element in the conception Of Immortality
in the Occidental mind. Undoubtedly,
l the majority of Christians would think inn
l mortality hardly worth considering if per-
sonal consciousness did not 90 with it.
| The Oriental mind, however, has never
| laid so much stress upon personal con-
seriousness. The Hindu throws Jump of
salt into the river. ut is gone," he says,
shut it is all there
The Oriental mind is capable of conceiv-
ing without dismay of the absorption Of
the individual soul into the eternal soul of
| the universe. 1t is not destruction, but
dedication. Were the perpetuity OF mind
the only problem before us, the answer OF
science would be easier and more unani-
nous. On the physical side science assures
Us that not an atom is lost. Matter
| changes its form, but does not die. III m at
ter is indestructible, is not the soul of m at
ter indestructible? And here Professor
Lester F. Ward assures rs that Science
postulates the Immortality, not of the
human soul alone, but OF the soul of the
least atom of matter" Compared with the
destiny of everlasting torture, which has
been offered to unnumbered millions of
the human race in the name of christian
ity, the destiny which science thus offers
to the soul is glowingly epitomistic.
DrrA suS a. h., 11kt4 AAof hn mr. n